INPUT LAG Relics Lost Cause

I dont know about everyone else but i'm still getting 3 seconds input lag for every single order. This makes micro and pathing a complete and utter nightmare.There has been absolutely no mention of fixing this from Relic nor has it been in any of the patches. Is this game shattering issue a lost cause ?

Unfortunately if you're playing someone who lives halfway across the world from you the p2p connection influences the input lag which you have, so that is why you still have it, if you played someone who lives near you or a comp you'll notice a much better difference.

Where are you ? US ? UK ? I play mostly 4vs4 and since i did a router's firmware upgrade i don't have this much input lag. Don't use the router's auto-upgrade, go rather to the vendor's support page. I sincerely hope that help you.

I have this problem with even people from europe (im UK) , I have not played 1 game in MP without input lag.

I have 50 MB fiber optic broadband

The input lag is more likely caused by a poor P2P connection than anything else. Relic has implemented multiple fixes already and has announced that they're looking into other solutions. However, at the end of the day, no matter how good you are, you simply cannot "code out" poor connectivity.

Also, as Inverse has explained (I didn't know this until he enlightened me) pretty much every major RTS still uses P2P connections because of the nature of the game. I'll save myself the embarrassment of trying to explain why this is the case because I do not know enough on the subject - perhaps Inverse or someone with more experience/knowledge of networking can step in and explain it for me. For now suffice it to say that using a server to host the game would actually increase the delay.

Anyways, what I'm getting at is that you can't really blame Relic when the fault doesn't necessarily lie on their end. Also keep in mind that as you increase the amount of players in a given match, the delay will increase exponentially because the amount of information that has to be sent increases dramatically, and you have to communicate this information to a greater number of players. Have you tried playing 1v1s or 2v2s and see if the lag is reduced there? (I don't know which game mode you play the most, just seems like most people prefer team games, which is fine)

Hi Ciez ,

The thing is CoH used P2P as well and input lag was not an issue. I believe this is more than just P2P something else is causing this.

Hi Ciez ,

The thing is CoH used P2P as well and input lag was not an issue. I believe this is more than just P2P something else is causing this.

Perhaps. I'm certainly not qualified to make a statement either way on this since I know very little of networking and next to nothing about how Relic actually handles everything behind the scenes with regard to this.

Would really take one of their insiders to comment on the issue as to whether or not there's an unseen factor causing increased delay. I'd like to assume that CoH2, being a newer game, actually has more information to communicate which might be a cause for increased lag when compared directly to COH1, but I could be completely mistaken in this assumption.

Also, I really do feel your pain. Most of my games are relatively smooth and I really appreciate them implementing their most recent fix that has increased unit responsiveness, but every now and then I get a game that is simply unplayable. (Often correlates with very bad-mannered Chinese/Aussie players) Very frustrating experience watching your units stand in a molotov for 3 seconds before even starting to move out - even though you ordered them to move while the Cons were throwing the damn thing.

Hi Ciez ,

The thing is CoH used P2P as well and input lag was not an issue. I believe this is more than just P2P something else is causing this.

You are both right and wrong. It can be just a connectivity issue or even your settings issue. P2P is peer to peer so basically your connection to the other player is not influenced only from your side you still have to take in mind the upload speed of the opponent as well as his graphic choices. The routing can be an issue as well.
So basically there is not much that can be done from Relic side, they can decrease the input lag to some level but they will never make it disappear. Also note that your Antivirus or Firewall can cause some latency in receiving files same goes for your opponent.

Posted this in another thread. Please, do some research before you complain about lag and demand a system (client-server rather than P2P) that would likely increase latency rather than improve it.

Because client-server in an RTS game is impractical. There isn't a single RTS game on the market right now that's client-server. The closest is SC2, and even then the server is only used to validate and route information. No calculations are being made server-side.

Why? Think about it. An RTS works by communicating commands between players. Each player has an exact copy of the game state, and simply processes the commands (move orders, build orders, etc.) it receives from the other player(s). In an RTS, though, that can mean processing potentially hundreds of individual commands at once, since there can be dozens of units on the screen and commands being made at any given time.

When all you're doing is sending basic commands, that's actually really easy to do. It only takes a few hundred kilobits a second to relay that information to a player. But if you try to get a server involved, everything increases exponentially. You have to send your commands to the server. Then the server has to process the game state with those commands and determine the state of the game at the next tick. Then the server has to send the entire game state to both players. Both players have to receive that game state so that they can continue playing. And because the server is running the game and the clients are just running shell instances of it, the information that has to be sent is exponentially larger, and grows rapidly the more units the server has to process.

That's why client-server doesn't work in RTS games. SC2 compromises nicely by routing messages through servers, which makes drop detection and some aspects of anti-cheat better, but doesn't do anything about latency. The only reason SC2 has better latency in general is because matchmaking is limited to the server you're on, and the player base is so much larger so the matchmaker can favour lower-ping matchups much easier.

On the other hand, client-server works great in MOBAs like LoL and Dota 2 because there are far less player-controlled units per game (usually 10-20, up to a max of about 50 or so in a 5v5 match) and far larger game sizes (pretty much every match is a 5v5). This means you're using less server CPU time and bandwidth for 10 players in a MOBA than you would for 2 players in an RTS. Economically and technically, it just doesn't make sense.

EDIT: For another perspective, read the first answer in this thread: http://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/65049/how-long-is-starcraft-2s-typical-input-delay-compared-to-other-competitive-game
He explains it a lot better that I could.

Posted this in another thread. Please, do some research before you complain about lag and demand a system (client-server rather than P2P) that would likely increase latency rather than improve it.

but Inverse, I was lagging because of P2P I'm telling you!

Posted this in another thread. Please, do some research before you complain about lag and demand a system (client-server rather than P2P) that would likely increase latency rather than improve it.

I don`t see him asking anywhere about dedicated servers. And please be more polite to people. I know its frustrating to be asked almost the same shit more than once, but this means people value your opinion and see you as a more experienced person who can clarify stuff. =)

He didn't, but people will, and the fact that every thread mentioning this references P2P is proof that almost everybody blames that system for part of their issues. I just asked that people do research before commenting.

vCoH was more responsive than CoH2 is because vCoH's animations were a lot sharper and happened instantly, instead of waiting for a transition animation to complete. The recent CoH2 patch was meant to improve this problem, but I haven't played it, so I can't comment. Anybody who thinks latency was better in vCoH is kidding themselves, though. Unless you played someone physically close to you, it was rather terrible.

He didn't, but people will, and the fact that every thread mentioning this references P2P is proof that almost everybody blames that system for part of their issues. I just asked that people do research before commenting.

vCoH was more responsive than CoH2 is because vCoH's animations were a lot sharper and happened instantly, instead of waiting for a transition animation to complete. The recent CoH2 patch was meant to improve this problem, but I haven't played it, so I can't comment. Anybody who thinks latency was better in vCoH is kidding themselves, though. Unless you played someone physically close to you, it was rather terrible.

I am aware of that and I agree with you, VCoH wasn`t better in regards to connectivity.
As you said it depends on the animation as well. The latest patch certainly improved the Input Lag issue.
And doing research is not an option for some people because to fully understand P2P they will be required to understand the TCP/IP structure aswell as other stuff.
In my opinion it easier to explain to them in a "monkey" language than actually asking them to do some research on their own, because after that they will have even more questions than answers

@Inverse

CoH INPUT LAG 0

CoH 2 Input LAG 3 SECONDS

You do the math

@Inverse

CoH INPUT LAG 0

CoH 2 Input LAG 3 SECONDS

You do the math

You either cant read what we both just said, or you just trolling

@Inverse

CoH INPUT LAG 0

CoH 2 Input LAG 3 SECONDS

You do the math

this is based on no real observations, or evidence just one guy making up numbers

@Inverse

CoH INPUT LAG 0

CoH 2 Input LAG 3 SECONDS

You do the math

k

People complained about lag in CoH. Trust me.

That CoH rubberbanding.

The problem here is people are confusing two different things. As Inverse explained already, the reason why vCoH did not have input lag was because "vCoH's animations were a lot sharper and happened instantly, instead of waiting for a transition animation to complete."

This has nothing to do with poor latency from a P2P connection. To be honest it is just shit coding from Relic, which they need to fix or CoH2 will NEVER be anything more then a mediocre retarded step child to what vCoH was.

Relic, can you confirm this? Is the CoH2 animations causing the input lag? Won't hold my breath for an answer.